Do patients with pathological health anxiety fear COVID-19? A time-course analysis of 12 single cases during the "first wave" of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
Pre-existing health anxiety is associated with an intensified affective response to the novel COVID-19 pandemic in the general population. Still, results on the reaction of people with a diagnosis of pathological health anxiety (i.e., hypochondriasis) are scarce.Methods
In the present study, we investigated the course of (health) anxiety related to SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 in comparison to (health) anxiety related to other severe diseases (e.g., cancer) in a sample of 12 patients with the diagnosis of pathological health anxiety during the "first wave" of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. Both SARS-CoV-2 related anxiety and anxiety related to other severe diseases were assessed weekly over 16 measurement points (30.03.-19.07.2020) and primarily analyzed with fixed effects regression analyses.Results
Unexpectedly, SARS-CoV-2 related anxiety was on average significantly lower than anxiety related to other severe diseases (d = -0.54, p < .001) and not significantly associated with anxiety related to other severe diseases or pre-COVID-19 health anxiety.Conclusion
It therefore appears premature to assume that SARS-CoV-2 related anxiety and other health worries are necessarily strongly interrelated and comparably high in people with pathological health anxiety.
SUBMITTER: Sauer KS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8632435 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:In context of the current COVID-19 pandemic the consumption of pandemic-related media coverage may be an important factor that is associated with anxiety and psychological distress. Aim of the study was to examine those associations in the general population in Germany. 6233 participants took part in an online-survey (March 27th-April 6th, 2020), which included demographic information and media exploitation in terms of duration, frequency and types of media. Symptoms of depression, unspecific anxiety and COVID-19 related anxiety were ascertained with standardized questionnaires. Frequency, duration and diversity of media exposure were positively associated with more symptoms of depression and unspecific and COVID-19 specific anxiety. We obtained the critical threshold of seven times per day and 2.5 h of media exposure to mark the difference between mild and moderate symptoms of (un)specific anxiety and depression. Particularly the usage of social media was associated with more pronounced psychological strain. Participants with pre-existing fears seem to be particularly vulnerable for mental distress related to more immoderate media consumption. Our findings provide some evidence for problematical associations of COVID-19 related media exposure with psychological strain and could serve as an orientation for recommendations-especially with regard to the thresholds of critical media usage.
| S-EPMC7371788 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by a novel coronavirus, which first appeared in China in late 2019, and reached pandemic distribution in early 2020. The first major outbreak in Europe occurred in Northern Italy where it spread to neighboring countries, notably to Austria, where skiing resorts served as a main transmission hub. Soon, the Austrian government introduced strict measures to curb the spread of the virus. Using publicly available data, we assessed the efficiency of the governmental measures. We assumed an average incubation period of one week and an average duration of infectivity of 10 days. One week after the introduction of strict measures, the increase in daily new cases was reversed, and the reproduction number dropped. The crude estimates tended to overestimate the reproduction rate in the early phase. Publicly available data provide a first estimate about the effectiveness of public health measures. However, more data are needed for an unbiased assessment.
| S-EPMC7246438 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We use the synthetic control method to analyze the effect of face masks on the spread of COVID-19 in Germany. Our identification approach exploits regional variation in the point in time when wearing of face masks became mandatory in public transport and shops. Depending on the region we consider, we find that face masks reduced the number of newly registered severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections between 15% and 75% over a period of 20 days after their mandatory introduction. Assessing the credibility of the various estimates, we conclude that face masks reduce the daily growth rate of reported infections by around 47%.
| S-EPMC7768737 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Modelling how a pandemic is spreading over time is a challenging issue. The new coronavirus disease called COVID-19 does not escape this rule as it has embraced over two hundred countries. As for previous pandemics, several studies have attempted to model the occurrence of cases caused by COVID-19. However, no study has succeeded in accurately modelling the impact of the infectious agent. Here we show that COVID-19 daily case distribution in humans obeys a Gamma law, which two new parameters can describe without any adjustment. Though the Gamma law has been exploited for nearly two centuries to describe the statistical distribution of spatial or temporal quantities, the goodness-of-fit rationale using two or three parameters has remained enigmatic. The new Gamma law approach we demonstrate here emerges from actual data and sheds light on the underlying mechanisms of the observed phenomenon. This finding has promising applicability in the epidemiological domain and in all disciplines involving branching systems, for which our Gamma law approach may bring a solution to hitherto unsolved problems.
| S-EPMC8912979 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe dynamic COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with mental strain. However, most studies focused primarily on the beginning of the pandemic and rarely took into account the long-term course. The aim of this prospective-longitudinal study was to investigate levels and changes of pandemic-related fears, unspecific anxiety, depressive symptoms, and psychosocial-behavioral factors over the first 1.5 years of the pandemic.MethodsWe conducted a nine-wave longitudinal online-survey from March 2020 to October 2021 with a total of 8148 participants of the adult general population in Germany. Descriptive examination and multilevel analysis were carried out to assess psychological burden, risk-bearing and protective psychosocial-behavioral factors, and associations with sociodemographics and the pandemic's duration and severity over the course of the pandemic.ResultsSymptoms of mental strain fluctuated across the pandemic and displayed a relative maximum at the pandemic's early beginning and during the second and third COVID-19 waves. Most participants (approximately 67.4 %-82.1 %) reported mild and transient symptoms, but a substantial portion (approximately 17.9 %-32.6 %) experienced pronounced mental health problems during the pandemic. Symptom severity was negatively associated with the duration of the pandemic and positively associated with the rate of new infections.LimitationsThe observational study design, non-probability-sampling methods, and online self-report assessments limit the generalizability of our results.ConclusionsThe fluctuating course of psychological burden during the pandemic emphasizes the relevance of continuous monitoring during this challenging time. Particularly individuals with pronounced subclinical symptoms or manifesting mental disorders should be targeted with adequate prevention and early intervention programs.
| S-EPMC9507788 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Studies conducted during the pandemic revealed strong associations between gender and COVID-19 related fear and anxiety. Females perceive coronavirus as a greater threat to personal health and population than males. The aim of the current meta-analysis is to estimate gender difference in COVID-19 related fear and anxiety. The second purpose of this study is to clarify the role of potential moderators in COVID-19 fear and anxiety. For these reasons, studies published between March 2020 and October 2021 were searched in various databases (Web of Science, SCOPUS, PubMed, and Google Scholar). In total, 315 studies met the inclusion criteria, and 60 studies for COVID-19 related fear and 23 studies for COVID-19 related anxiety were included in the current study. Cohen's d effect size values were calculated based on these individual studies showing the difference between males and females in terms of COVID-19 related fear and anxiety. Results revealed that gender has a moderate and statistically significant effect on COVID-19 related fear (ES = 0.307) and anxiety (ES = 0.316) in favor of females. Moderator analyses showed that continent variable was a statistically significant moderator of gender difference in COVID-19 related fear and anxiety. The highest effect size of gender differences in COVID-related fear and anxiety were obtained from the studies conducted in Europe. However, other moderators (the average age of sample, culture, timing, and population) were not statistically significant. Although this meta-analysis has a few limitations, the findings showed that COVID-19 outbreak negatively affected females more.
| S-EPMC9090872 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMany studies have previously compared the prevalence or sample means of distress and mental health problems from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic, while results on changes at the individual-level, and regarding multiple outcome measures are demanded.MethodsThis online study investigated individual changes in stress and mental health from before the COVID-19 pandemic to the first lockdown in adults from Southeastern Germany. This region was selected as it was where SARS-CoV-2 was first documented in Germany, and also due to the implementation of strict stay-at-home orders and social contact prohibitions. From April 10-27, 2020, we collected state measures and their clinical relevance for the subareas of perceived stress: worries, tension, joy, and demands. We also collected information regarding the following mental health problems: depression, anxiety, pathological worry, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and health anxiety; as well as retrospective measures of how participants felt they have changed in comparison to before the pandemic, ranging from worse to better.ResultsThe analytical sample comprised 396 adult participants. On average, participants experienced increases in worries, tension, and lack of joy, and increases in mental health problems, but a decrease in demands. Perceived increases in symptoms of depression (26.0%) and PTSD (25.5%) were significantly more frequent than in symptoms of anxiety (particularly acute fear and panic) (5.6%), pathological worry (9.8%), and health anxiety (7.3%) (ps<.001). One per 10 participants (10.4%) reported an increase in depressive symptoms, and nearly two per 10 (18.4%) an increase in PTSD symptoms and additionally showed a clinically relevant symptom strain during lockdown. Interestingly, mainly non-specific PTSD symptoms associated with a general stress reaction were experienced to be increased.ConclusionThe findings suggest a dissociation of perceived changes in subareas of stress and mental health with a particular experience of increases in depressive and general stress symptoms and a decrease in external demands. This points to a need for a more differentiated view on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on stress and mental health, and for targeted interventions for mental health problems arising frequently during the pandemic.
| S-EPMC9354380 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough numerous studies have been published on the predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, some possible predictors remain underexplored. In this study, we explored the associations of unwillingness and indecisiveness regarding COVID-19 vaccination with generalized trust, mental health conditions such as depression and generalized anxiety, and fear of COVID-19.MethodsData of wave 1 (from October 27 till November 6, 2020) and wave 3 (from April 23 till May 6, 2021) of a longitudinal online study conducted in Japan were used for the analyses. Unvaccinated participants were asked at wave 3 about their willingness to be vaccinated, with possible responses of willing, unwilling, or undecided. These three responses were used as the outcome variable, and multinomial logistic regression analyses were conducted with willingness to be vaccinated as the reference group. Explanatory variables included generalized trust, depression, generalized anxiety, and fear of COVID-19 both at wave 1 and 3, and sociodemographic and health-related variables.ResultsOf the 11,846 valid respondents, 209 (1.8%) answered that they had already been vaccinated against COVID-19, 7089 (59.8%) responded that they were willing to be vaccinated, 3498 (29.5%) responded that they were undecided, and 1053 (8.9%) responded that they were unwilling to be vaccinated. After adjusting for covariates, we found that: (1) participants with lower levels of generalized trust at wave 1 and 3 were more likely to be undecided or unwilling at wave 3; (2) respondents with moderately severe or severe depression at wave 1 and 3 were more likely to be undecided at wave 3; (3) participants with moderate or severe levels of generalized anxiety at wave 3 but not at wave 1 were more likely to be unwilling at wave 3; and (4) respondents with high levels of fear of COVID-19 at wave 1 and 3 were less likely to be undecided and unwilling at wave 3.ConclusionsGeneralized trust, mental health conditions such as depression and generalized anxiety, and low level of fear of COVID-19 are associated with unwillingness or indecision regarding being vaccinated against COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8764499 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The present study examined the psychometric properties of the Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS) using an online survey of 398 adult Amazon MTurk workers in the U.S. Confirmatory factor analyses demonstrated that the CAS measures a reliable (? = 0.92), unidimensional construct with a structure that was shown to be invariant across gender, race, and age. Construct validity was demonstrated with correlations between CAS scores and demographics, coronavirus diagnosis, history of anxiety, coronavirus fear, functional impairment, alcohol/drug coping, religious coping, hopelessness, suicidal ideation, as well as social attitudes (e.g., satisfaction with President Trump). The CAS also demonstrated solid discrimination ability for functional impairment (AUC =0.88), while the original cut score of ?9 (76% sensitivity and 90% specificity) showed the strongest diagnostic effectiveness among scores. Overall, these findings are largely consistent with the results of the first CAS investigation and support the validity of this mental health screener for COVID-19 related research and practice.
| S-EPMC7237368 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has led to a high interest in mathematical models describing and predicting the diverse aspects and implications of the virus outbreak. Model results represent an important part of the information base for the decision process on different administrative levels. The Robert-Koch-Institute (RKI) initiated a project whose main goal is to predict COVID-19-specific occupation of beds in intensive care units: Steuerungs-Prognose von Intensivmedizinischen COVID-19 Kapazitäten (SPoCK). The incidence of COVID-19 cases is a crucial predictor for this occupation.MethodsWe developed a model based on ordinary differential equations for the COVID-19 spread with a time-dependent infection rate described by a spline. Furthermore, the model explicitly accounts for weekday-specific reporting and adjusts for reporting delay. The model is calibrated in a purely data-driven manner by a maximum likelihood approach. Uncertainties are evaluated using the profile likelihood method. The uncertainty about the appropriate modeling assumptions can be accounted for by including and merging results of different modelling approaches. The analysis uses data from Germany describing the COVID-19 spread from early 2020 until March 31st, 2021.ResultsThe model is calibrated based on incident cases on a daily basis and provides daily predictions of incident COVID-19 cases for the upcoming three weeks including uncertainty estimates for Germany and its subregions. Derived quantities such as cumulative counts and 7-day incidences with corresponding uncertainties can be computed. The estimation of the time-dependent infection rate leads to an estimated reproduction factor that is oscillating around one. Data-driven estimation of the dark figure purely from incident cases is not feasible.ConclusionsWe successfully implemented a procedure to forecast near future COVID-19 incidences for diverse subregions in Germany which are made available to various decision makers via an interactive web application. Results of the incidence modeling are also used as a predictor for forecasting the need of intensive care units.
| S-EPMC9019290 | biostudies-literature